CADE Vision & Current Initiatives Joint CSDR/EVM Training

Transcription

1 CADE Vision & Current Initiatives Joint CSDR/EVM Training May 2016 Daron Fullwood, CADE Deputy Program Manager, Charlotte Tarr, Tecolote Research, Last Updated: May 13, 2016

2 Purpose/Overview Purpose: Provide overview of CADE s Objective Update the aviation community on current Initiatives Overview CADE Overview Objective Vision Coalition CSDR/EVM Co-Plan Initiative PATH FORWARD Request industry/ government assistance to successfully implement initiatives FlexFile Overview/What We Need From You? 1921 Today s Burdensome Process Why the FlexFile? Efficiencies Realized FlexFile Evolution Technical Data 1921-T/1921-Q/1921-R SRDR (Development/Maintenance) 2

3 Why We Need This Data: Improved Acquisition Outcomes IMPROVED ACQUISITION OUTCOMES: Authoritative Quality Data: Cooperative Planning and Compliance lead to better data and improved program management Common Terminology: has created the ability to estimate across Departments Full view of Weapons Systems Program Performance: Visual analytics, trend analysis & technical data to improve cost realism and make informed decisions BETTER DATA: Quality: Authoritative Quality Data means more time for analysis; less time collecting data. Completeness: Integrated data enables comprehensive assessments; less burden on industry Availability: Near real-time access to data Transparency: Authoritative Source data also increases confidence in results STRONGER DECISION SUPPORT: Standardized: Standardized data collection supports standardized analysis Cost Realism: Fundamental to preparing credible cost estimates & contract negotiations Institutional Knowledge: Effective tool to retain historical knowledge and turn data into information Budget Preparation: Used to assess the adequacy of budgets and program plans Cost analysts will have data and institutional knowledge at their fingertips. It will be the exception not the rule that we have to go back to Industry to do our estimates 3

4 Aircraft, UAV CADE Coalition: The Cost Community, AT&L & Industry Cost FlexFile: John Fitch, NCCA CSDR/EVM Co-Plan, WBS Alignment: John McGregor, AT&L PARCA/EVM : Mike Biver and Dr. Carol Moore, CAPE Sustainment: Tom Henry, CAPE, Lisa Mably, AFCAA Missiles Radar, C2 Center, C4I Commodity Study Joint Effort ICBM O&S Navy Ship Technical SRDR: Ranae Woods, AFCAA CARD: Curt Khol, CAPE Tech Data WG: Greg Hogan, AFCAA MAIS WG: Richard Mabe, AFCAA Space WTV MAIS Scott Adamson, AFCAA Air Force AFCAA CEM joint effort on CADE, commodity leads, Contracts Databases, SMC early FlexFile prototypes AFCAA Ranae Woods, Greg Hogan, John Cargill, AFCAA Cari Pullen, AFCAA Navy FlexFile, JCARD (NAVAIR), Ships WG, CCRL, CER Handbook USMC USMC BOM/CER Effort Patty Hach, AFCAA Lisa Mably, AFCAA Praful Patel, Ben Breaux, NCCA Office Collaboration Army JIAT, ACDB/WTV prototype, WTV CIPT, TACOM, Historical Data Migration MDA MDA-DCARC alignment, CCRG NCCA Duncan Thomas, John Fitch, Greg Hogan, AFCAA AT&L EVM-CR, CSDR/EVM Co-Plans, DAVE (DAMIR, AIR, Kaleidoscope) DDR&E/SE tech data; Big Data initiative, LM&R CARD input, DCMA, DPAP, DAU Aivars Baumanis, DASA-CE David Holm, TACOM Stephen Pawlow PEO Land Systems Richard Mabe, AFCAA Industry LM, Boeing, NGC, BAE, GDLS, HII, Ball Aerospace CSDR Focus Group, JSCC, Joint Training, NDIA, WTV CIPT, Aviation CIPT DASA-CE David Henningsen, Sean Vessey, 4

5 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise CSDR/EVM Co-Plan Initiative Reduce Contractor Administrative Burden: Align reporting structures for CCDR and IPMR reporting Up-front planning prior to RFP release Standardization of WBS by commodity and phase Reduce ad-hoc data collection Strategic Planning between PM, CAPE, PARCA & Services: One voice, one direction Support needs of both Cost & EV communities Joint review/approval process Integrated Post Award Meeting CAPE & PARCA Co-Planning Process Old EV Planning Process CSDR Planning Process New Co-CSDR/EVM Planning Process Better Data: Less allocations caused by CCDR and CPR misalignment Insight into requirements pre-rfp Standard process 5

6 FlexFiles The Future of Cost Analysis 6

7 FlexFiles: Objectives A Win-Win Government and Industry Partnership Increase Efficiency: Collect data according to the contractor s management structure Removal of legacy 1921 forms Reduce ad hoc/supplemental government data collection efforts Much easier and less time consuming for Industry allows them to reduce back end support Automation: data flows directly from contractor systems into ours Improving Data Quality: Eliminate Human Error/Subjectivity Collect raw data, and use technology to eliminate arbitrary allocations and errors Consistent application of Mil-STD-881C to both EV and CSDR data data Alignment Review and mapping pre-contract award Ensure Completeness: Provides much more insight and analysis flexibility Annual submissions Receive data over time Include cost and supporting technical data 7

8 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Merge Two Different Use Cases for Data Analysts Focused on Single Program: Requires detailed understanding of one program Develops & defends programs budget submissions Supports PM, FM, Logistics, & contracting officer Needs to talk contractor s language Analysts Focused on Early Alternatives/Independent Estimates: Requires general understanding of many programs Discerns highest effectiveness alternatives from different solutions Evaluates realism of budget submissions in context of broader historical experience Needs to compare systems from many contractors/programs Needs: Detailed data on one specific program over time Needs: Translatable data across many programs over time The cases are dissimilar, but not mutually exclusive. A program cost analyst may be asked to show comparisons, a generalist may need to dig into detailed data to understand what is going on in history. 8

9 History of the FlexFile Effort Jul BAE, GDLS FlexFile discussion Apr LM Space FlexFile follow-up discussion Jun LM Space and Aero discussion with cost community FlexFile beginning Dec LM Prototype discussion (F-35, PAC-3, SBIRs) Apr BAE site visit and FlexFile initial discussion (PIM) Oct SMC FlexFile discussion/ Boeing FlexFile Pilot initiation (WGS) Jan GDLS FlexFile discussion Feb Northrop Grumman FlexFile discussion Apr Ball Aerospace FlexFile discussion (small ctr. pilot) JSC C JSC JSC C C JSC C JSC C Traditional CCDR data collection. Evolving from handwritten documents to XML submissions Aug LM Space Systems Cost Chief briefing Oct CADE Focus Group and FlexFile Kickoff Jan EV community involvement w/ the FlexFile Apr CADE Focus Group w/ LM presenting FlexFile implementation Jun Boeing Defense FlexFile brief to CFO and Head of Space Oct LM visit on the FlexFile (recreating the 1921 series) Oct CADE Focus Group Nov BAE Feb nd FlexFile DID Draft completed Apr BAE FlexFile follow-up Today CADE Focus Group (Concept to reality) System FlexFile Pilot Aug First May 2016 initiation (Bradley Draft of the FlexFile ECP) DID completed Huntington Ingalls FlexFile follow-up discussion May 2016 GDLS Lima, OH site visit Nation Defense Industrial Association Joint 1/2014, Space 8/2015 Cost Council 7/2014, 3/2015, Aviation CIPT 5/2014, 9/2014, 5/2015, 4/2016 Wheeled and Tracked Vehicle IPT 9

10 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Round 1 Pilots October 2015 Aircraft Team: CAPE, AFCAA, NCCA, NAVAIR, and JSF JPO Space Team: CAPE, AFCAA, SMC, NCCA, and PO Ground Vehicle Team: CAPE, DASA-CE, TACOM, NCCA, and MARCORSYSCOM December 2015 August 6, 2015: Developed FlexFile DID for pilots & feedback from government and industry: Established Process for FlexFile prototypes with industry partners Creation of working-level government teams: CAPE/DCARC leadership socialized pilots with contractor/government leadership Government teams reviewed data/compared with other reports Identification of pilot programs with Lockheed, Boeing, and BAE Systems Discussed current CCDR generation practice & data systems with contractors Mapped instruction data fields to contractor data fields in 4-6 hour meetings w/ contractors Reviewed LM data provided in Sep 2015 Boeing/BAE generated FlexFile and provided walk-through by telecon Instruction feedback/lessons learned folded into FlexFile Pilot Round 2 draft DID, dated February 5,

11 Round 2 Pilots February 2016 May 2016 February 5, 2016: FlexFile Instruction Revised draft released for comment & support second round of pilots FlexFile XML Schema & IT Tool Development Funded development for Mar-Aug 2016 FlexFile Pilot Round #2 (Feb-May 2016) GDLS (Stryker, meeting 02 May) BAE (PIM, M88A2, meeting 12 Apr) (non-evm) Boeing Aviation O&S (platform TBD) GBI (Boeing building data set) Northrop Grumman (B-2 EHF, meeting 24 Feb, NGC building data set) Huntington-Ingalls (Ship program, meeting TBD) Ball Aerospace (Small contractor, meeting TBD) Objective: Expand Scenarios, Contractors, and Systems Command Involvement 11

12 FlexFile Draft DID (May 2016) C A WBS Dictionary & Remarks WBS Index Definitions by WBS Cost Content Work Content Supplier & GFE elements Contractor Remarks, Comments by WBS Element Direct-Reporting Subs Contractor Cost Data Report Unallocated Actual Costs & Hours WBS, Control Account, Work Package Data by Month Recurring vs. Nonrecurring CLIN & Lot Functional Rate (Gov & Internal) As required by Co-Plan F Estimates at Completion Estimates at Complete (EAC) by WBS Element (as required by Co-Plan) B Metadata Program Name Contract # Approved Co-Plan # Contractor Name, Location, POC As of Date Submission Event Name Phase Report Type D E Allocation Methodology Contractor s Distribution of Unallocated Actual Costs Unit/Lot Level Allocation Contractor Cost Data Field Dictionary G Supplemental Information MRP Floor Hours Report Contractor Internal Accounting Data Field Descriptions 12

13 Data Group C: FlexFile Data Fields Actual Cost & Hours To Date Allocation Methodology % Cost & Hour Estimates At Completion CLIN Recurring vs. Nonrecurring Contractor Functional Rate Categories Product Structure: 1. Co-Plan WBS 2. Second-Tier Structure (Control Account) 3. Third-Tier Structure (Work Package) Government Functional Rate Categories Functional Structure (OBS) Lot Number Time Period: Time Phased by Month 13

14 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise FlexFile Critical Path FlexFile XML Schema IT Infrastructure Development IOC IT Tool Development DID Draft #3 Round 3 Pilots Training Policy Updates April June September December Phased Roll-Out of FlexFile: 1. On EVM reporting contracts as contractors become familiarized with new instruction-jan Non-EVM, sustainment, and small contractors will follow as pilots prove DID in these areas DCARC is evaluating early pilot data submissions in lieu of CCDR reports as incentive for pilot support 14

15 CADE Path Forward 15

16 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise FlexFile Evolution Summer 2014 Summer 2015 SEP DEC 2015 FEB MAY 2016 MAR AUG 2016 Future 881-C 881-C % 881-C 881-C % 881-C 881-C 881-C Concept Definition Insight into Cost Accounts & Re-Create 1921 (LRIP Allocated Program) Insight into Cost Accounts & Unallocated Data & Allocation Methodology Round 2 Pilots: - Small Ctr - Sustainment - Ship and WTV Process Oriented WBS IT Development XML Schema design Software App Dev - XML Ingest - Data export Allocation and mapping matrix provided for contractor and government analysts (Development Program) (Production Program with Allocation Table) Contractor 881C Cost Accumulation Contractor Unallocated Total Cost Bins Government Analyst Allocation 16

17 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Path to FlexFile Summer 2014 Summer 2015 September December 2015 JAN - MAY 2016 MAR AUG 2016 Future 881-C 881-C % 881-C 881-C % 881-C 881-C 881-C Concept Definition Insight into Cost Accounts & Re-Create 1921 (LRIP Allocated Program) (Development Program) Insight into Cost Accounts & Unallocated Data & Allocation Methodology (Production Program with Allocation Table) Round 2 Pilots: - Small Ctr - Sustainment - Ship and WTV Process Oriented WBS IT Development XML Schema design Software App Dev - XML Ingest - Data export Allocation and mapping matrix provided for contractor and government analysts Once we can prove through the pilot that a program can submit a FlexFile with an allocation matrix we are ready to work with you to replace the CCDR requirement with a FlexFile 17

18 CADE Planned Accomplishments Next 12 months Policy: Final CARD Guidance Final SRDR DID Draft 1921-T DID (including quantity) Standard CSDR Co-Plans FlexFiles FlexFile Prototype Instruction and Prototypes (Draft DID) CSDR Planning and Validation Coordination with the Services CER Handbook Business Processes: Co-Plan (DD Form 2794) Air Force CEM, MAIS, Army WTV, Navy Ships CARD Tables CSDR Plan Standards CADE Library IT Development (release 4.5 to 5.0): Cross Program Query CADE Analytics SRDR cpet Desktop FlexFile Development 18

19 CADE Initiatives Cost Assessment Data Enterprise 19

20 CADE Initiatives Continued Cost Assessment Data Enterprise 20

21 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise CADE Closing: Why It s Important Improved Acquisition Outcomes: Authoritative Quality Data: Cooperative planning and compliance lead to better data and improved program management Cost Realism: Provide real-time cost data for analysis and facilitating quicker contract negotiations Full view of Weapons Systems Program Performance: Visual analytics, trend analysis and technical data to improve cost realism and make informed decisions Efficient and Effective Analysis (at all levels: OSD, Services, PMOs): Improved Analytical Rigor and Productivity More time for analysis and execution; Less time collecting and feeding data More comprehensive assessments and reduced burden on industry Cost Community Coordination: Revolutionizing cost data collection Cost community ownership of leadership, training and estimating responsibility Improving terminology and practices across Departments Let s continue to become more efficient together 21

22 Technical Data Charlotte Tarr 2

23 Tech Data Streamlining Lessening Burden and Improving Data Current State: Current data collection methods are ad-hoc, inefficient and scattered across the department Result: We re-construct technical analogies for nearly every estimate Commodity Unique Templates Estimating Requirements Comprehensive data source CAR D Interim Policy (Jun 15) Updated Format Annual Delivery Historical Record CADE MIL- STD 881C WBS (Oct 11) Air Force Army Navy Tech Data Report T Other Data SWaP parameters Complement to cost and software Completes the CARD Collaborate with Acquisition and Technical Communities; SE, L&MR and ARA FY15 FY16 FY17 Interim CARD Draft 1921-T Final CARD Final 1921-T Train and Transition Authoritative data source One stop shop for analysis Visual Analytics 23

24 Aircraft Tech Data Example 24

25 Technical Data Report MGMT DID TECHNICAL QUANTITY REPAIR PART FORMAT 1 (1921- T) Technical Parameter Name Unit of Measure Value Part ID # Estimate/Actual Group Key Margin Value Source Unit of Measure Qualifier Comments FORMAT 2 (1921- Q) To Date/At Completion Units: Lot/Block Units Completed To Date Units in Process Model/Variant/Flight At Completion QTY Internal QTY Concurrent QTY GFE Units Comments FORMAT 3 (1921- R) Repair Event System/End Item Data: End Item Number Model/Variant Failure Data: Non-Mission Capable Scheduled Event Failure Code Failure Code Description Repair Data: Start/Completion Date Maintenance Type/Level Man Hours Labor/Material Cost Report Frequency by Design Gate Report Frequency by Cost Report Report Frequency by Cost Report 25

26 1921-Q Reporting Requirements WBS Element Code & Name, as required by the Approved Plan Units Completed To Date and Units in Process End Item Units by Model/Variant, as well as spares and test items Non-Delivered Units, Concurrent Units, and GFE Units At Completion Contractor Comments by WBS 26

27 Vehicle 1921-Q Example B 27

28 1921-T Reporting Requirements Part ID for Unique/Commo n Identification of Parts per WBS Element (Part ID Mapping Table) Item Type and Technical Parameter Name, as required by the Approved Plan Group Key to cluster related parts, Value by part, and Margin if applicable Unit of Measure and Qualifier, as required by the Approved Plan For each reported Value, identify as Estimate/Actu al and contractor s Value Source Contractor Comments by Part 28

29 Vehicle 1921-T Example The Part ID/Key Mapping Table allows the technical parameter values from a specific hardware component to be specified and collected once, yet pertain to multiple occurrences throughout the WBS. 29

30 Software Data Update SRDR DID STATUS: Government and industry review of Data Item Descriptions (DIDs) complete Submitted to WHS for approval MAJOR DID UPDATES: Changes Enhance all Cost/Effort, Size, and Schedule visibility Consolidated Initial and Final Developer Report DIDs (currently two separate) into one DID establishing Initial, Interim, and Final reports Established software maintenance reporting Final Report time phased by month SRDR CADE IT DEVELOPMENT EFFORT: Draft SRDR Data Item Descriptions DIDs were developed by a joint service working group 30

31 Technical and Software Data Focus Group When & Where May 24, 2016 SAFTAS, Crystal City, Virginia Who Technical data managers Software engineers Please send your Technical data managers and Software Engineer POCs to Cathy Ferguson at (571) , to be included in our invitation Topics Technical data collection initiatives Updated Software Resources Data Report (SRDR) Data Item Description (DID) How is technical data generated and captured in contractor IT systems? What is involved with generating technical data reports? Call for Industry Presenters Looking for industry representatives to discuss their processes and systems used to collect and manage technical data To coordinate attendance and presentations please also contact Cathy Ferguson 31

32 CADE Cost Assessment Data Enterprise 2016 ICEAA Professional Development & Training Workshop CADE Joint Training Philadelphia, May 2017 Presenters: James Parnham Marc Stephenson Last Updated: May 6,

33 Course Objectives By the end of the course, you will be able to: Analysts Industry Understand how CADE improves productivity Facilitate and Reduce your CSDR burden & data calls Support a Decision-Makers full view of Weapons Systems Performance Appreciate how CSDR planning improves effectiveness Explain the utility of CSDRs Improve data quality through CSDR planning 33

34 Why We Need This Data Improved Acquisition Outcomes Cost Realism: Fundamental to preparing credible cost estimates Used to assess the adequacy of budgets and program plans Analysis Effectiveness: Near-real-time access to data Integrated data enables more comprehensive assessments More time for analysis; less time collecting data Decision Support: Standardized data collection supports standardized analysis Source data transparency increases confidence in results Community Integration: Provides a common data set to every DoD analyst Allows for collaboration across departments and disciplines 34

35 Why Should You Care More Efficient and Effective Analysis Time to Prepare Estimate Improve Analyst Productivity: Less burden on analyst to retrieve and process data Become familiar with programs more quickly Complete analysis facilitates telling the program s story Comprehensive Data: Improved Planning and Compliance lead to better data One-stop shop for Cost, EVM, Programmatic, and Technical Centralized virtual library includes CARDs and ICEs Cost analysts will have data and institutional knowledge at their fingertips. It will be the exception not the rule that we have to go back to Industry to do our estimates 35

36 What Happens When We Don t Own the Data Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act Defense Acquisition Reform Initiatives 1990 s reform efforts limited cost data collection and damaged DoD s ability to produce quality cost estimates 36

37 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Why Should You Comply? WSARA DoDD Weapon System Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 Assigns the responsibilities of the DCAPE DoDM M-1 CSDR Plan DFARS Mandates CSDR Policy DoDI Summarizes CSDR reporting thresholds Guidance for the CSDR process MIL-STD- 881C Product Oriented Reporting Structures CDRLs DIDs DD Forms Overarching regulation for all acquisition that requires cost data collection Policies for management of all acquisition programs Requirements for programs with CSDRs CSDR implementation documents Systematic cost data collection is necessary for program stability 37

38 CADE Authoritative Data Sources Acquisition Quantity SARs Funding Technical Cost DAES Schedule Cost Acquisition DAMIR ARA Software Cost Size Earned and Hours Value Effort Earned Value DACIMS Technical SRDRs CCDRs 1921-T Cost Schedule DCARC EVM-CR IPMRs CPRs PARCA Acquisition Technical 38

39 Dashboard default view CADE Total Access Dashboard Site-Level Navigation Contextual Help and Feedback Program-specific data Immediate access to Favorite Programs Shortcuts to related information 39

40 CADE Authoritative Data Sources 40

41 EVM-CR The EVM Engine Access point to the EVM-CR (Either a CAC or ECA Certificate is required) Viewers for Contract Performance Report (CPR) and Integrated Master Schedule (IMS files) Data Item Descriptions (DIDs), Sample CDRL Language, and Guides extensible Markup Language (XML) Schemas and Data Exchange Instructions (DEIs) Tools for EVM success are available at 41

42 CADE Authoritative Data Sources 42

43 DCARC The CSDR Engine Access point to the CSDR- SR (Either a CAC or ECA Certificate is required) Still having trouble? Send us an All policy documents are available for you to verify if this requirement applies to your program. (Program Offices) CSDR Plan implementation documents to assist you in the planning process (Analysts) CSDR reporting documents to ensure proper reporting practices (Data Providers) Tools for CSDR plan and form generation. *GENERATES XML FORMATS (Analysts and Data Providers) Data repository containing 47,027 reports as of May 2015, on 400 MDAP programs Tools for CSDR success are available at 43

44 What are Cost and Software Data Reports? (CSDRs) CCDR SRDR CSDR Contractor Cost Data Report Software Resources Data Report Cost and Software Data Report How does this help me? What types of reports does DCARC have? Why are these reports required? What purpose do CSDRs serve? Organized via a standard, product-oriented WBS Reporting required on MDAP/MAIS contracts and subcontracts Over $50M Optional between $20M and $50M Helps us project future program & contract costs Available to all DoD Government analysts electronically CSDRs are a collaborative effort amongst the whole cost and acquisition community 44

45 Cost and Acquisition Community Participants PEO or SYSCOM Program Office Role Initiate CSDR process at Program Office; identify all RFP's going out Help develop initial plans; work directly with contractors; identify RFP s Government Program Office OSD CAPE Provide input to plan to ensure cost needs are being met; provide final approval of plans PEO of SYSCOM OSD CAPE Service Cost Center DCARC Help develop initial plan; provide input to plan to ensure cost needs are being met; provide initial approval Manage the entire CSDR planning process; ensure all rules and regulations are being followed PARCA Community Service Cost Center Industry PARCA If sole source, provide input and help government understand processes and procedures Provide input to ensure cost reporting structure and WBS are consistent where needed Industry DCARC Full cooperation within the community has led to significantly improved data quality and analysis, reduced re-work, and improved decision outcomes. 45

46 Types of CSDRs CCDR SRDR CSDR Functional Breakout By Tail Number Dictionary Cost Summary Cost Data Summary Report (DD 1921) Summary cost data for all elements on approved contract CSDR plan Functional Cost- Hour Report (DD ) Cost and hour data for specific elements broken down by functional category Progress Curve Report (DD ) Lot or Unit reporting of direct recurring costs to date for specific hardware elements Business Base Contractor Business Data Report (DD ) Direct & Indirect cost, hour & employee data by functional category for a Contractor Business Unit Sustainment Contract Work Breakdown Structure Dictionary (CWBS) Lists all contract data reporting elements with definitions of technical, work, and cost content Plan CSDR Plan (DD 2794) CSDRs Sustainment Report (DD ) Nonrecurring & recurring costs reported against a sustainment cost element structure & functional categories Software Software Resource Data Reports (SRDRs) Size, schedule & effort on data on software development CSDR Data We Collect Today Technical Data Report (1921-T) Coming Soon 46

47 CSDR Plan DD Form 2794 CCDR SRDR CSDR CSDR Plan 1. MAJOR PROGRAM a. NAME: Pre-A B C-FRP A C-LRIP O&S 6a. POINT OF CONTACT (POC) NAME AND ADDRESS (Include ZIP Code) COST AND SOFTWARE DATA REPORTING PLAN 3. SUBMISSION TYPE4. CURRENT SUBMISSION INITIAL DATE (YYYYMMDD) Form Approved OMB No The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 8 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Executive Services Directorate ( ). Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE ABOVE ORGANIZATION. b. PHASE/MILESTONE c. PRIME MISSION PRODUCT Metadata 2. WBS SYSTEM TYPE CHANGE 6b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include Area Code) 6c. FAX NUMBER (Include Area Code) 6d. ADDRESS 5. LAST APPROVED PLAN DATE (YYYYMMDD) Defines WBS used for CSDR submissions 7. PLAN TYPE PROGRAM 8. PREPARING CONTRACT (PRIME) ORGANIZATION CONTRACT (SUB) 11. WBS ELEMENT CODE a. PROGRAM/ CONTRACT/ SUBCONTRACT b. CONTRACT/ SUBCONTRACT 9a. CONTRACTOR NAME/ADDRESS i. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 12. WBS REPORTING ELEMENTS ii. DIVISION 9b. CONTRACT NUMBER 13. REPORTS REQUIRED (X if applicable) a. CWBS DICTIONARY b. DD 1921 (CDSR) 9c. APPROPRIATION RDT&E PROCUREMENT O&M c. DD (FCHR) DD (CBDR): d. DD (PCR) 10. APPROVED PLAN NUMBER e. DD (CSR) f. SRDR FORMATS Identifies required reports Element Code and Reporting Elements 14. CSDR SUBMISSION DATES Required Reports Lists Submission Events and expected due dates Contains Standard Plan Language and Special Contractor Instructions DD FORM 2794, MAY 2011 a. SUBMISSION 15. REMARKS DD FORM 2794 (PAGE 2), MAY 2011 b. FORM(S) PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE c. EVENT Submission Events Contract Plan Language and Special Instructions d. AS OF DATE e. DUE DATE (YYYYMMDD) (YYYYMMDD) 47

48 CSDR Plan DD Form 2794 CCDR SRDR CSDR CSDR Plan Defines WBS used for CSDR submissions Identifies required reports Lists Submission Events and expected due dates Contains Standard Plan Language and Special Contractor Instructions 48

49 CWBS Dictionary CCDR SRDR CSDR CWBS Dictionary Provides definitions for all WBS elements Cost, technical and work content included in definitions Physical description for all hardware elements Element Codes CWBS CODE X P-49 Phoenix Fighter 1.1 X Air Vehicle X Airframe X Propulsion X X X X X X X 1.2 X 1.3 X 1.4 X 1.5 X 1.6 X 1.7 X 1.8 X 1.9 X 1.10 X 1.11 X Metadata CWBS ELEMENT LEVEL Element Levels Contract Work Breakdown Structure Dictionary Vehicle Subsystems Avionics Armament/Weapons Delivery Auxiliary Equipment Furnishings and Equipment Air Vehicle Software Air Vehicle Integration, Assembly, Test, and Checkout Systems Engineering Program Management System Test and Evaluation Training Data Peculiar Support Equipment Common Support Equipment Operational/Site Activation Industrial Facilities Initial Spares & Repair Parts CWBS ELEMENT NAME Element Names Program: P-49 Phoenix Fighter RFP No: XXXXX Contract Plan No.: A-10-X-C1 Contract No: DAAE07-XX-E-0001 Date: 9/26/2012 Point of Contact: Erin Bell, (310) , ebell@company.com CWBS DEFINITION This WBS element includes the cost of the P-49 Phoenix Fighter in addition to the cost of the common WBS elements. The P-49 Phoenix Fighter is an Army aircraft developed to conduct anti-submarine warfare. This WBS element reports the total production cost, includes all design, development, production, and procurement efforts associated with the total complement of equipment, software, services, facilities, and integrated logistics support that are necessary to deliver and maintain the aircraft, through the cost for the common WBS elements. WBS element 1.1 Air Vehicle captures the cost of the product, while WBS elements 1.3 through capture the cost of the "common elements". The air vehicle element includes design, production, material and equipment procurements including associated vendor design/development efforts to provide for a functionally integrated air vehicle including installation of engines and avionics and all contractor The airframe consists of all design, production, and equipment procurements including vendor design to provide the fuselage, canopy assemby, and access doors. The makeup of the air frame is comprised of steel and composite metals including aluminum alloys. This element includes the basic structure including the wings, fuselage, empennage, and nacelle. The propulsion system incorporates the X-5231 engine. The engine is started by firing the initiator by command by the Missile Control Unit. The initiator is connected to the engine start cartridge and the igniter cartridge. The start cartridge produces high pressure gasses which impinge on a turbine, thereby spinning the engine up to starting speed. The vehicle subsystems includes design, production, material and equipment procurements including associated vendor design/development efforts to provide for the Auxiliary Power Unit, Airframe Mounted Accessory Drive, Air Turbine Starter, oil cooling lines. The equipments perform engine starting on the ground, emergency starting during flight, ground checkout operations of aircraft accessories, and power takeoff for hydraulic pumps and electrical generator system and fuel motive flow pumps. The avionics includes the X-1PY radar, radar altimeter, direction finding set, doppler compass, computer. The contractor is procuring this item from a supplier, and is also completing tests upon delivery. This WBS element is not applicable to this contract. This WBS element is not applicable to this contract. This WBS element is not applicable to this contract. This WBS element is not applicable to this contract. The air vehicle integration, assembly, test and checkout is conducted by the contractor at the contractor's site. It includes load analysis, stress analysis, and maintenance effort. Also included is the joining and instalaction of all third level WBS elements into the air vehicle, as well as final acceptance testing. All work is being conducted by the contractor at the contractor's facilities. This WBS element is not applicable to this contract. Program management includes the contractor's efforts to perform tasks required for planning and control of program schedules, cost and technicla performance including WBS maintenance, work authorizations, budgeting and data reporting. Also included is management and maintenance of the requirements database. This WBS element is not applicable to this contract. This WBS element is not applicable to this contract. This WBS element is not applicable to this contract. This WBS element is not applicable to this contract. This WBS element is not applicable to this contract. This WBS element is not applicable to this contract. This WBS element is not applicable to this contract. This WBS element is not applicable to this contract. Technical, Work, and Cost Content Definitions 49

50 Cost Data Summary Report DD Form 1921 CCDR SRDR CSDR DD 1921 Displays ALL WBS elements Recurring & Nonrecurring costs SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 1. MAJOR PROGRAM a. NAME: b. PHASE/MILESTONE Pre-A B C-FRP A C-LRIP O&S 6. CUSTOMER (Direct-reporting subcontractor use only) 11. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE a. START DATE (YYYYMMDD): b. END DATE (YYYYMMDD): 7. CONTRACT TYPE 8. CONTRACT PRICE 12. APPROPRIATION 13. REPORT CYCLE 14. SUBMISSION NUMBER INITIAL INTERIM FINAL Form Approved OMB No NAME (Last, First, Middle Initial) 18. DEPARTMENT 19. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include Area Cod20. ADDRESS 21. DATE PREPARED (YYYYMMDD) WBS ELEMENT CODE A WBS REPORTING ELEMENTS B Unclassified 3. REPORTING ORGANIZATION TYPE 4. NAME/ADDRESS (Include ZIP Code) 5. APPROVED PLAN PRIME / DIRECT- GOVERNMENT a. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION b. DIVISION NUMBER ASSOCIATE REPORTING CONTRACTOR SUBCONTRACTO R 9. CONTRACT 10. TYPE ACTION CEILING a. CONTRACT NO.: c. SOLICITATION NO.: e. TASK ORDER/DELIVERY b. LATEST MODIFICATION: d. NAME: ORDER/LOT NO.: RDT&E PROCUREMENT O&M NUMBER OF UNITS TO DATE C COST DATA SUMMARY REPORT The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 8 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Executive Services Directorate ( ). Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE ABOVE ORGANIZATION. Metadata 2. PRIME MISSION PRODUCT 15. RESUBMISSION NUMBER 16. REPORT AS OF (YYYYMMDD) COSTS INCURRED TO DATE (thousands of U.S. Dollars) NUMBER OF COSTS INCURRED AT COMPLETION (thousands of U.S. Dollars) UNITS AT NONRECURRING RECURRING TOTAL COMPLETION NONRECURRING RECURRING TOTAL D E F G H I J Actual costs to date, estimates at completion Number of Units Element Codes and Reporting Elements To Date Units To Date Costs (Nonrecurring, Recurring, Total) At Completion Units At Completion Costs (Nonrecurring, Recurring, Total) Contract Totals 22. REMARKS G&A, FCCM, UB, MR, and Fee Remarks DD FORM 1921, MAY 2011 PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION Unclassified 50

51 Cost Data Summary Report DD Form 1921 CCDR SRDR CSDR DD 1921 Displays ALL WBS elements Recurring & Nonrecurring costs Actual costs to date, estimates at completion Number of Units Contract Totals G&A, FCCM, UB, MR, and Fee 51

52 Functional Cost-Hour Report DD Form CCDR SRDR CSDR DD Insight into individual WBS elements SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 1. MAJOR PROGRAa. NAME: b. PHASE/MILESTONE 2. PRIME MISSION Pre-A B C-FRP PRODUCT A C-LRIP O&S 3. REPORTING ORGANIZATION TYPE 6. CUSTOMER (Direct-Reporting Subcontractor Use Only) 7. TYPE ACTION 8. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE a. START DATE (YYYYMMDD) : Unclassified FUNCTIONAL COST-HOUR REPORT a. CONTRACT NO.: b. LATEST MODIFICATION c. SOLICITATION NO.: d. NAME: 9. REPORT CYCLE 10. SUBMISSION NUMBER 11. RESUBMISSION NUMBER 12. REPORT AS OF (YYYYMMDD) INITIAL INTERIM FINAL 4. NAME/ADDRESS (Include Zip Code) a. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION b. DIVISION 16. ADDRESS e. TASK ORDER/DELIVERY ORDER/LOT NO.: Form Approved OMB No The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 16 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Executive Services Directorate ( ). Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE ABOVE ORGANIZATION. b. END DATE (YYYYMMDD) : PRIME / ASSOCIATE CONTRACTOR Metadata DIRECT-REPORTING SUBCONTRACTOR GOVERNMENT 13. NAME (Last, First, Middle Initial) 14. DEPARTMENT 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include Area Code) 5. APPROVED PLAN NUMBER 17. DATE PREPARED (YYYYMMDD) Recurring & Nonrecurring costs Actual costs to date, estimates at completion Detailed breakout of all resource data Reporting by functional categories Functional Categories 18. WBS ELEMENT CODE ENGINEERING (1) DIRECT ENGINEERING LABOR HOURS (2) DIRECT ENGINEERING LABOR DOLLARS (3) ENGINEERING OVERHEAD DOLLARS (4) TOTAL ENGINEERING DOLLARS MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS (5) DIRECT TOOLING LABOR HOURS (6) DIRECT TOOLING LABOR DOLLARS (7) DIRECT TOOLING & EQUIPMENT DOLLARS 22. REMARKS DD FORM , MAY WBS REPORTING ELEMENT 20. NUMBER OF UNITS FUNCTIONAL DATA ELEMENTS (8) DIRECT QUALITY CONTROL LABOR HOURS (9) DIRECT QUALITY CONTROL LABOR DOLLARS (10) DIRECT MANUFACTURING LABOR HOURS (11) DIRECT MANUFACTURING LABOR DOLLARS (12) MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS OVERHEAD DOLLARS (Including Tooling and Quality Control) (13) TOTAL MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS DOLLARS (Sum of rows 6, 7, 9, 11, and 12) MATERIALS (14) RAW MATERIAL DOLLARS (15) PURCHASED PARTS DOLLARS (16) PURCHASED EQUIPMENT DOLLARS (17) MATERIAL HANDLING OVERHEAD DOLLARS (18) TOTAL DIRECT-REPORTING SUBCONTRACTOR DOLLARS (19) TOTAL MATERIAL DOLLARS OTHER COSTS (20) OTHER COSTS NOT SHOWN ELSEWHERE (Specify in Remarks) SUMMARY WBS Element Code and Name (21) TOTAL COST (Direct and Overhead) Remarks Number of Units to Date and at Completion a. TO DATE b. AT COMPLETION COSTS AND HOURS INCURRED TO DATE (thousands of U.S. Dollars or thousands of hours) A. NONRECURRING B. RECURRING Costs and Hours Incurred to Date 21. APPROPRIATION RDT&E PROCUREMENT O&M C. TOTAL D. NONRECURRING E. RECURRING F.TOTAL SECURITY CLASSIFICATION COSTS AND HOURS INCURRED AT COMPLETION (thousands of U.S. Dollars or thousands of hours) Costs and Hours Incurred at Completion Unclassified 52

53 Functional Cost-Hour Report DD Form CCDR SRDR CSDR DD Insight into individual WBS elements Recurring & Nonrecurring costs Actual costs to date, estimates at completion Detailed breakout of all resource data Reporting by functional categories 53

54 Functional Cost-Hour Report DD Form CCDR SRDR CSDR DD Insight into individual WBS elements Recurring & Nonrecurring costs Actual costs to date, estimates at completion Detailed breakout of all resource data Reporting by functional categories 54

55 Progress Curve Report DD Form CCDR SRDR CSDR DD For specific hardware WBS elements SECURITY CLASSIFICATION Unclassified Form Approved PROGRESS CURVE REPORT OMB No The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 16 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Executive Services Directorate ( ). Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE ABOVE ORGANIZATION. 1. MAJOR PROGRAM a. NAME: b. PHASE/MILESTONE 2. PRIME MISSION 3. REPORTING ORGANIZATION TYPE 4. NAME/ADDRESS (Include ZIP Code) Pre-A B C-FRP PRODUCT PRIME / ASSOCIATE DIRECT-REPORTING GOVERNMENT a. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION b. DIVISION A C-LRIP O&S CONTRACTOR SUBCONTRACTOR 5. APPROVED PLAN NUMBER 6. CUSTOMER (Direct-Reporting Subcontractor Use Only) 7. TYPE ACTION 8. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE a. START DATE (YYYYMMDD): b. END DATE (YYYYMMDD): Metadata a. CONTRACT NO.: c. SOLICITATION NO.: e. TASK ORDER/DELIVERY b. LATEST MODIFICATION d. NAME: ORDER/LOT NO.: 9. REPORT CYCLE 10. SUBMISSION NUMBER 11. RESUBMISSION NUMBER INITIAL INTERIM FINAL 13. NAME (Last, First, Middle Initial) 14. DEPARTMENT 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include Area Code) 16. ADDRESS 12. REPORT AS OF (YYYYMMDD) 17. DATE PREPARED (YYYYMMDD) Unit or Lot reporting Technical Characteristics To Date, Direct Recurring costs & hours Detailed breakout of resource data Reporting by functional category Functional Categories 18. WBS ELEMENT CODE 19. WBS REPORTING ELEMENT 20. UNITS/LOTS COMPLETED (1) MODEL AND SERIES (2) FIRST UNIT (3) LAST UNIT (4) CONCURRENT UNITS/LOTS CHARACTERISTICS (5a) Weight (5b) Speed (5c) Power WBS Element Code and Name ENGINEERING (RECURRING ONLY) (22) TOTAL DIRECT COST 22. REMARKS DATA ELEMENTS (6) DIRECT ENGINEERING LABOR HOURS (7) DIRECT ENGINEERING LABOR DOLLARS MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS (RECURRING ONLY) (8) DIRECT TOOLING LABOR HOURS (9) DIRECT TOOLING LABOR DOLLARS (10) DIRECT TOOLING & EQUIPMENT DOLLARS (11) DIRECT QUALITY CONTROL LABOR HOURS (12) DIRECT QUALITY CONTROL LABOR DOLLARS (13) DIRECT MANUFACTURING LABOR HOURS (14) DIRECT MANUFACTURING LABOR DOLLARS (15) TOTAL DIRECT MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS DOLLARS (Sum of rows 9,10,12, an MATERIALS (RECURRING ONLY) (16) RAW MATERIALS DOLLARS (17) PURCHASED PARTS DOLLARS (18) PURCHASED EQUIPMENT DOLLARS (19) TOTAL DIRECT-REPORTING SUBCONTRACTOR DOLLARS (20) TOTAL DIRECT MATERIAL DOLLARS OTHER COSTS (RECURRING ONLY) (21) OTHER DIRECT COSTS NOT SHOWN ELSEWHERE (Specify in Remarks) SUMMARY (RECURRING ONLY) Remarks DD FORM , PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION Unclassified UNIT TOTAL LOT TOTAL A. COMPLETED UNITS/LOTS (thousands of U.S. Dollars or thousands of hours) A1 A2 A3 Lot or Unit Total Completed Units/Lots A4 21. APPROPRIATION RDT&E PROCUREMENT O&M B. WORK IN PROCESS (WIP) (thousands of U.S. Dollars or thousands of hours) Work in Process C. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS AND HOURS INCURRED TO DATE (thousands of U.S. Dollars or thousands of hours) Total Direct Costs and Hours Incurred to Date 55

56 Progress Curve Report DD Form CCDR SRDR CSDR DD For specific hardware WBS elements Unit or Lot reporting Technical Characteristics To Date, Direct Recurring costs & hours Detailed breakout of resource data Reporting by functional category 56

57 Progress Curve Report DD Form CCDR SRDR CSDR DD For specific hardware WBS elements Unit or Lot reporting Technical Characteristics To Date, Direct Recurring costs & hours Detailed breakout of resource data Reporting by functional category

58 Contractor Business Data Report DD Form CCDR SRDR CSDR DD Report per contractor site Covers all DoD business Direct Costs by Program Indirect Cost Categories Direct Labor Rates by Function Organization & Accounting Changes S E C T I O N SECURITY CLASSIFICATION A Program Name a A/F Contract Number b Equivalent Units c CONTRACTOR BUSINESS DATA REPORT Overhead Accumulation, Distribution, and Application DIRECT: COST / HOURS / MANPOWER (Report dollars and hours in thousands) Engineering Manufacturing Operations Materials Other Buyer d Workers e Other DoD Effort 12. Other Government Effort 13. Commercial Effort 14. Total Direct Cost and Hours Base $ $ $0.0 $ a. Total Direct Workers INDIRECT: COST / HOURS / MANPOWER (Report dollars and hours in thousands) Engineering Manufacturing Operations Materials Other INDIRECT COST CATEGORY Workers o Dollars f Dollars p Hours g Hours q Workers h Workers r 15. Indirect Labor 16. Employee Benefits S 17. Payroll Taxes E 18. Employment C 19. Communication/Travel T 20. Production Related I 21. Facilities-Building/Land O 22. Facilities-Furniture/Equipment N 23. Administration CONTRACTOR BUSINESS DATA REPORT - PAGE 2 S E 24. Future Business PRODUCTION CAPACITY Current Year Method of Calculating "FPR unit % of Full Production Capacity" C B T 25. Other Miscellaneous I O FPR Unit % of Full Production Capacity 26. Credits Production Capacity N 27. Total Indirect Cost and Hours Number of Shifts C $ $ $0.0 $ Total G&A Cost and Hours Current Year (Report hours in thousands) $ Indirect/Direct Cost Rate 0.00% 1st Quarter 0.00% 2nd Quarter 0.00% 0.00% 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Prior Year Year: 30. G&A Rate/(Direct + Indirect) Basic Effective Basic Effective Basic Effective Workers Hours Workers Hours Workers Hours 0.00% Basic Effective Basic Basic S DIRECT LABOR RATES Workers Hours E Rate$ Rate$ Rate$ Rate$ Rate$ Rate$ Rate$ Rate$ Rate$ Rate$ DD FORM , MAY 2011 (FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES) a b c d SECURITY a CLASSIFICATION b a b a c d c d Page b C 1 o c d c c T I 1. Engineering - Direct Labor O N 2. Manufacturing Operations - Direct Labor Direct Labor Rates D a. Tooling - Direct Labor b. Quality Control - Direct Labor c. Manufacturing - Direct Labor Dollars i Dollars s Hours j Hours t Dollars k Dollars u Workers l Workers v Dollars m Dollars w Hours n Hours x Form Approved OMB No The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 30 hours per response, including the time for review ing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and review ing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Executive Services Directorate, Information Management Division, 1155 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC ( ). Respondents should be aw are that notw ithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply w ith a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE ABOVE ORGANIZATION. 1. CONTRACTOR NAME/ADDRESS (Include Zip Code) 2. FPR UNIT 3. IMPLEMENTING CONTRACT NUM4. DATA PERIOD (X o5. FISCAL YEAR (YYY6. DATES IN FISCAL YEAR (YYYYMMD Prior Year Start Date: Current Yea End Date: Metadata Future Year 7. PREPARER'S NAME (Last, First, Middle Initial) 8. DEPARTMENT 9. TELEPHONE NO. (Include Area Cod10. ADDRESS DIRECT COST BY PROGRAM Direct Cost by Program Indirect Cost Categories S E C T I O N E S E C T I O N F REMARKS Total FPR Unit Revenue (Sales) (thousands of dollars) Prior Year Current Year Organizational Changes (For Each Year Reported) Revenue 11. DATE PREPARED (YYYYMMDD) DD FORM , MAY 2011 SECURITY CLASSIFICATION Page 2 of 2 Dollars y Organizational and Accounting Changes Remarks G&A Hours z Accounting Changes (For Each Year Reported) Year: Basic Rate$ c 58

59 Contractor Business Data Report DD Form CCDR SRDR CSDR DD Report per contractor site Covers all DoD business Direct Costs by Program Indirect Cost Categories Direct Labor Rates by Function Organization & Accounting Changes

60 Contractor Sustainment Functional Cost-Hour Report DD Form CCDR SRDR CSDR DD Insight into individual WBS elements Recurring & Nonrecurring costs Actual costs to date, estimates at completion Detailed breakout of all resource data Reporting by sustainment functional categories Sustainment Functional Categories 1. MAJOR PROGRAM a. NAME: b. PHASE/MILESTONE 2. PRIME MISSION Pre-A B C-FRP PRODUCT A C-LRIP O&S 6. CUSTOMER (Direct-Reporting Subcontractor Use Only) 7. TYPE ACTION a. CONTRACT NO.: b. LATEST MODIFICATION: c. SOLICITATION NO.: d. NAME: e. TASK ORDER/DELIVERY ORDER/LOT NO.: 8. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE 9. REPORT CYCLE 10. SUBMISSION NUMBER 11. RESUBMISSION NUMBER 12. REPORT AS OF (YYYYMMDD) a. START DATE (YYYYMMDD) : INITIAL b. END DATE (YYYYMMDD) : Metadata INTERIM FINAL 13. NAME (Last, First, Middle Initial) 14. DEPARTMENT 15. TELEPHONE NO. (Include Area Code) 16. ADDRESS 17. DATE PREPARED (YYYYMMDD) 18. WBS ELEMENT CODE 19. WBS REPORTING ELEMENT 20. NUMBER OF UNITS 21. APPROPRIATION a. TO DATE b. AT COMPLETION RDT&E WBS Element Code and Name PROCUREMENT at Completion O&M COSTS AND HOURS INCURRED TO DATE COSTS AND HOURS INCURRED AT COMPLETION (thousands of U.S. Dollars or thousands of hours) (thousands of U.S. Dollars or thousands of hours) SUSTAINMENT FUNCTIONAL DATA ELEMENTS A. NONRECURRING B. RECURRING C. TOTAL D. NONRECURRING E. RECURRING F.TOTAL ENGINEERING (1) DIRECT ENGINEERING LABOR HOURS (2) DIRECT ENGINEERING LABOR DOLLARS (3) ENGINEERING OVERHEAD DOLLARS (4) TOTAL ENGINEERING DOLLARS PROGRAM MANAGEMENT (5) DIRECT PROGRAM MANAGEMENT LABOR HOURS (6) DIRECT PROGRAM MANAGEMENT LABOR DOLLARS (7) PROGRAM MANAGEMENT OVERHEAD DOLLARS (8) TOTAL PROGRAM MANAGMENT DOLLARS (9) TOUCH MAINTENANCE LABOR HOURS (10) TOUCH MAINTENANCE LABOR DOLLARS (11) TOUCH MAINTENANCE OVERHEAD DOLLARS (12) SUPPORT MAINTENANCE LABOR HOURS (13) SUPPORT MAINTENANCE LABOR DOLLARS (14) SUPPORT MAINTENANCE OVERHEAD DOLLARS (15) TOTAL MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS DOLLARS MATERIALS (16) RAW MATERIAL DOLLARS (17) PURCHASED PARTS DOLLARS (18) PURCHASED EQUIPMENT DOLLARS (19) MATERIAL HANDLING/OVERHEAD DOLLARS (20) TOTAL DIRECT-REPORTING SUBCONTRACTOR DOLLARS (21) TOTAL MATERIAL DOLLARS OTHER COSTS (22) OTHER COSTS NOT SHOWN ELSEWHERE (Specify in Remarks) SUMMARY (23) TOTAL COST (Direct and Overhead) CONTRACTOR SUSTAINMENT FUNCTIONAL COST-HOUR REPORT 3. REPORTING ORGANIZATION TYPE PRIME / ASSOCIATE CONTRACTOR DIRECT-REPORTING SUBCONTRACTOR GOVERNMENT 4. NAME/ADDRESS (Include Zip Code) a. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION b. DIVISION Form Approved OMB No The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 16 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Executive Services Directorate ( ). Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE ABOVE ORGANIZATION. MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS 22. REMARKS Remarks Number of Units to Date and Costs and Hours Incurred to Date Costs and Hours Incurred at Completion 5. APPROVED PLAN NUMBER DD FORM , MAY 2015 SECURITY CLASSIFICATION Unclassified 60

61 Contractor Sustainment Functional Cost-Hour Report DD Form CCDR SRDR CSDR DD Insight into individual WBS elements Recurring & Nonrecurring costs Actual costs to date, estimates at completion Detailed breakout of all resource data Reporting by sustainment functional categories 61

62 Initial and Final Software Resource Data Reports (SRDRs) CCDR SRDR CSDR SRDR Software size, effort, and schedule NUMBER OF SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS Section AMOUNT OF DELIVERED CODE REUSED FROM EXTERNAL SOURCE (i.e., NOT INHERITED FROM PREVIOUS INCREMENT/BUILD OR PREDECESSOR) Section AMOUNT OF DELIVERED CODE INHERITED (i.e., REUSED FROM PREVIOUS INCREMENT/BUILD or PREDECESSOR) COMMENTS TOTAL NEW Section FINAL TOTAL DELIVERED CODE Section AMOUNT OF DELIVERED CODE DEVELOPED NEW Section AMOUNT OF DELETED CODE SOFTWARE ACTIVITY NAME (Example: SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS) Section 3.3 ACTUAL PRODUCT SIZE REPORTING NUMBER OF EXTERNAL INTERFACE REQUIREMENTS COUNTING CONVENTION TOTAL NEW HUMAN GENERATED AUTO GENERATED WITH MODIFICATIONS WITHOUT MODIFICATIONS WITH MODIFICATIONS WITHOUT Section 3.4 ACTUAL RESOURCE AND SCHEDULE REPORTING MODIFICATIONS TOTAL DELIVERED CODE PRIME CONTRACTOR ONLY REQUIREMENTS VOLATILITY Software Size MAPS TO CSDR WBS NUMBER(S) ALL OTHER SUBCONTRACTORS START MONTH END MONTH TOTAL TOTAL HOURS ALL HOURS PRIME OTHER CONTRACTOR SUBCONTRACTORS ONLY Data further explained in data dictionary (Example: SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURE AND DETAILED DESIGN) (Example: SOFTWARE CODING AND UNIT TESTING) (Example: SOFTWARE INTEGRATION) (Example: SOFTWARE QUALIFICATION TESTING) (Example: SYSTEM/SOFTWARE INTEGRATION) (Example: SYSTEM/SOFTWARE QUALIFICATION TESTING) Effort and schedule Initial Developer Report- Due at beginning of project increment (estimates) (Example: SOFTWARE QUALITY ASSURANCE) (Example: SOFTWARE CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT) (Example: SOFTWARE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT) ALL OTHER DIRECT SOFTWARE ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT EFFORT (Example: DATA, PROCESS IMPROVEMENT, INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION & VALIDATION, PROBLEM RESOLUTION) TOTAL SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT EFFORT COMMENTS Comments Final Developer Report- Due at completion of project increment (actuals) 62

63 SRDR Initial and Final Software Resource Data Reports (SRDRs) CCDR SRDR CSDR Software size, effort, and schedule Data further explained in data dictionary Initial Developer Report- Due at beginning of project increment (estimates) Final Developer Report- Due at completion of project increment (actuals)

64 Initiate II/IIA SV Procurement Initiate IIR SV Procurement Initiate IIIA SV Procurement End IIRM Retrofit Initiate IIRM Retrofit End IIR SV Procurement End II/IIA SV Procurement Initiate IIF SV Procurement Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Future of CSDRs CCDR SRDR CSDR Pre unreadable image files 2015 Easier data manipulation via Excel & XML Future Complete, seamless knowledge sharing Navstar Space and Control PE (O&M) OCX PE (Development & Procurement) Mixed Development PEs GPS IIIA/B PE (Procurement) GPS IIIA/B PE (Development) Navstar Space and Control PE (MILCON) Navstar Space and Control PE (MilPer) Not checked for arithmetic or logic errors cpet and manual validations Cost community collaboration Accountability 0 0 FlexFiles Navstar Space and Control PE (Procurement) Navstar Space and Control PE (Development) Collect data according to the contractor s financial structure Data mapped to MIL-STD-881C Reduction in labor to produce reports 3 Tech Data Standardized technical data collection Improved CARD process & data Actuals reported from industry FlexFiles and Tech Data will reduce the time for data collection and increase the quality of data analytics 64

65 Using the Data EXAMPLE 1: Projecting Future Lots 65

66 How to Use the Data: Projecting Future Lots Using the Functional Cost Hour Report (DD Form ), we can determine the total and per unit recurring costs for each functional category and the associated overhead costs Lot Total Units Produced Total Recurring Direct Manufacturing Labor Total Recurring Other Labor Recurring Material Cost Total Recurring Overhead Cost Total Recurring Cost Lot 1 10 $158,321.6 $141,258.8 $200, $202, $702, Lot 2 20 $269,146.7 $268,391.7 $380,631.0 $445,622.3 $1,363, Lot 3 40 $457,549.4 $509,944.3 $723,198.9 $971,456.7 $2,662,

67 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise How to Use the Data: Projecting Future Lots $25,000 Manufacturing Labor Dollars Per Unit $35, $30, $25, $20, Manufacturing $15, Overhead 1500 Hours $10, $5, $0 0 Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 Material Dollars Per Unit Other Labor Per Unit $25, $20,000 $20, $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 Material Overhead $15,000 $10,000 $5, Other Labor Overhead Hours $0 Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 $0 Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot

68 How to Use the Data: Projecting Future Lots Average Unit Cost: IPMR Format 1 Lot Total Units Produced Total Costs $100,000.0 $90,000.0 Lot 1 10 $702, $80,000.0 $70,000.0 Lot 2 20 $1,363, Lot 3 40 $2,662, $60,000.0 $50,000.0 $40,000.0 Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 No breakout of functional categories or overhead leads to a flat learning curve from lot to lot Using the IPMR Format 1, you only get insight into the total cost. Format 1 fails to break out costs by functional category and overhead. 68

69 Projecting Future Lots: Sample Problem Sample Problem: Parnham Corp. is contracted to build 80 units in Lot 4. Using both CSDR Data and IPMR Data, how much will Lot 4 cost per unit? 69

70 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Projecting Future Lots: Sample Problem Using the Contractor Business Data Report (DD Form ), you know that the overhead rate for Parnham Corp. has increased by 11% in the performing year due to cancellation of one of the firm's major programs $35, Overhead Per Unit $30, $25, $20, $15, Material OH Manufacturing OH Other OH $10, $5, $0.00 Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 Lot 4 70

71 Projecting Future Lots: Sample Problem Lot Total Units Produced Total Recurring Cost per Unit Improvement Total Cost Lot 1 10 $70,246.8 $702, Lot 2 20 $68, % $1,363, Lot 3 40 $66, % $2,662, Lot 4 80 $68, % $5,452, Projection $80,000.0 Total Cost Per Unit: $76,000.0 $72,000.0 $68,000.0 $64,000.0 $70,246.8 $68,189.6 $66,553.7 $68,153.8 $60,000.0 Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 Lot 4 The increase in Total Cost is due to 11% increase in overhead rate from

72 Projecting Future Lots: Sample Problem Lot Total Units Produced Total Recurring Cost per Unit Improvement Total Cost Lot 1 10 $70,246.8 $702,468.1 Lot 2 20 $68, % $1,363,791.8 Lot 3 40 $66, % $2,662,149.2 Lot 4 80 $64, % $5,182,471.2 Projection $80,000.0 Total Cost Per Unit: IPMR Format 1 $76,000.0 $72,000.0 $68,000.0 $64,000.0 $70,246.8 $68,189.6 $66,553.7 $64,780.9 $60,000.0 Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 Lot 4 Using the IPMR, you have no insight into this change in overhead rate and no means to estimate the per unit impact 72

73 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Projecting Future Lots: Sample Problem $74,000.0 Total Cost Per Unit: IPMR Format 1 vs $72,000.0 IPMR $70,000.0 $68,000.0 $70,246.8 $68,153.8 $68,189.6 $66,000.0 $66,553.7 $64,000.0 $64,780.9 $62,000.0 $60,000.0 Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 Lot 4 $3.4M per unit difference leads to a $270M discrepancy over 80 units 73

74 Using the Data EXAMPLE 2: Profit Margin on FFP Contracts 74

75 How to Use the Data: Determining Profit What CSDRs Give You: Benefits from Using CSDR Profit Data: Provide cost and price insight into Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contracts on all MDAP Programs with contracts over $50M Profit is reported consistently on all contracts that require CSDR reporting EVM reporting is not required on FFP contracts Provide the Government Insight Into Profit Going Into Negotiations Allows the Government to Make an Informed Decision on How to Contract Moving Forward Stronger Negotiation Starting Point 75

76 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Where to get profit 1921 Summary Elements 76

77 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Profit Analysis Using CSDRs Between Prime and Sub, ~44% of price is profit! Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3 Lot 4 Lot 5 77

78 Why you should use CSDRs CCDR SRDR CSDR CSDRs collect data on the actual costs and software effort for contracts on all MDAP and MAIS programs A wide variety of forms are available to collect data necessary for estimating Reporting structure is organized according to a standard, product oriented WBS which fosters comparability of data across companies, plants, weapon system commodity groups, and major subassemblies CADE innovates to make analysts more effective and to reduce burden on data providers Collecting the necessary data via CSDRs reduces time spent collecting data and increases time for analysis 78

79 What We Need From You Register for Portal Access Assist/Inform DCARC of need for CSDR planning PRIOR to RFP release or mod Use tools available on CADE website to fulfill CSDR requirements Tools for CSDR success are available at 79

80 CADE Cost Assessment Data Enterprise 2016 CADE Training CSDR/EVM Co-Planning Presenters: Brian Kolstad Last Updated: May 6,

81 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Standard Co-Planning Benefits Alignment of CCDR and IPMR Reporting Structures Up-front Planning Prior to RFP release Standardization of WBS by Commodity and Phase Standardized Planning Process STANDARD CO-PLAN One Voice, One Direction PM, CAPE, PARCA & Services Less Allocations Caused by CCDR and CPR Misalignment Reduction in Contractor Administrative Burden Integrated Post Award Meeting Support needs of both Cost & EV communities 81

82 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Standard Plan Goals Objective Consistency program-to-program within a commodity group across Services Better communication of expectations to Industry Work Products Standard CSDR Plans for each commodity area Extensions to 881C appendices Implemented as starting point for DCARC CSDR Planning Benefits Insight into EVM Reporting Requirements prior to RFP Release/Contract Award Review and approval of EVM & CSDR reporting structures Reduction of administrative burden on Industry Less allocation of costs 82

83 CSDR/EVM Co-Plan Format Co-Plan Metadata WBS Element Codes & Names CSDR Reporting Requirements EVM Reporting & IPMR Reporting Level of Consistency 83

84 Cost and Acquisition Community Participants PEO or SYSCOM Program Office Role Initiate CSDR process at Program Office; identify all RFP's going out Help develop initial plans; work directly with contractors; identify RFP s Government Program Office OSD CAPE Provide input to plan to ensure cost needs are being met; provide final approval of plans PEO of SYSCOM OSD CAPE Service Cost Center DCARC Help develop initial plan; provide input to plan to ensure cost needs are being met; provide initial approval Manage the entire CSDR planning process; ensure all rules and regulations are being followed PARCA Community Service Cost Center Industry PARCA If sole source, provide input and help government understand processes and procedures Provide input to ensure cost reporting structure and WBS are consistent where needed Industry DCARC Full cooperation within the community has led to significantly improved data quality and analysis, reduced re-work, and improved decision outcomes. 84

85 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Top Level Planning Process 180+ Days Before RFP 90 Days Before RFP Days Before RFP RFP Release Contract Award CWIPT Formation CSDR Planning CSDR Contracting Reporting Contractor Submits Reports CSDR Reporting & Validation RFP Identified ID upcoming or pending RFPs Review all sources of contract information Ensure CSDR language and plan are included Initial Plan Drafted DCARC/CAPE/PARCA Review Plan CWIPT Approves Organize key players Draft initial plan Collect supporting documentation Service Cost Center Reviews DCARC/PARCA Director Reviews DDCA and PARCA Approve Host CSDR plan review at Service Cost Level Ensure Plan is reviewed by stakeholders Address pertinent cost community concerns Review plans for analytic rigor Dissemination to PO RFP Release Color Key Service Component POC Program Office OSD CAPE Service Cost Center POC DCARC Contractors PARCA CWIPT Dissemination to Contractors Contract Award Post Award Meeting Validation of Cost Reports Review all CSDR reports Ensure CSDR compliance Coordinate w/ contractors 85

86 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise RFP Identified RFP Identified CRITICAL to the SUCCESS OF CSDRs All Stakeholders should assist in identifying: Contracts > $50M Competitive Bid? Sole source? When will the contract be awarded? Review all sources of contract information Confirm Release date and contract award date RFP and/or Contact Award information should always be relayed to DCARC office. The Service Component POC and the PMO/SPO would be responsible relaying this information. After RFP identified: Set up initial CSDR planning meeting with key customers (NCCA, PMO, CAPE Analyst, EV Service Center, Syscom & DCARC) Ensure CSDR language and plan are included in the RFP Result: Service Component POC and PMO/SPO should always give DCARC heads up in advance 86

87 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Initial Plan Drafted Initial Plan Drafted Coordination takes approximately hours per plan Work with Program Office to identify effort Review CDRLs and SOW language Coordinate with CWIPT on initial draft plan Utilize CEM Standard Co-Plans: Compliant with MIL-STD-881C Compliant with cpet (CSDR Planning and Execution Tool) Captures entire contractual effort Satisfies CWIPT cost needs Request following documents from the Program Office: Program Schedule CDRLs SOW Language Resource Distribution Table (RDT) CEM Standard Co-Plans available at: 87

88 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise CWIPT Approves Plan CWIPT is responsible for providing the thought leadership from a cost estimating perspective CWIPT Approves Coordination takes approximately hours per plan Going forward, the SYSCOM is responsible for coordinating the CWIPT and ensuring everyone agrees on the plan; if there is no SYSCOM rep, then the responsibility falls to the Service Cost Center All members of the CWIPT must vote in the Program Planning Module (PPM) in order for the plan to go up for approval Plans will not be approved without agreement from the entire CWIPT CWIPT is responsible to the Program Manager for ensuring CSDR plans provide accurate, timely data in order to support cost estimating needs. The Program Manager is ultimately responsible for the formation of the CWIPT. 88

89 Service Cost Center CSDR Plan Review Service Cost Center will hold a meeting to ensure the CSDR plan meets cost community needs. The POC will provide initial approval of the CSDR plan before forwarding it to CAPE for final approval. Service Cost Center Reviews LESSONS LEARNED: Review plan & understand plan package prior to meeting Plan accordingly for the data you need ahead of time Gain CWIPT agreement prior to meeting Include PMO in invite Include CAPE analyst The following questions must be considered at this meeting: How are you going to use this data? Does this plan get you the data that you need? Does this plan get you the data when you need it? How many data points will you have for the next Milestone decision? Does this plan capture the entire contractual effort? Are all of the efforts on the contract (i.e. new build vs. buying kits vs. upgrades) discretely broken out in either the WBS or the reporting events? Will there be any learning on any aspects of the contract? Are s applicable? Is there any software development effort? Are the SRDRs broken out by CSCI? How is the rate tooling broken out? Is it worthwhile getting? Are the modification/installation/integration costs segregated? Are there any anti-tamper or cyber security costs for this program? Result: Entire CWIPT team should attend meeting and be prepared to answer all questions 89

90 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Top Level Planning Process 180+ Days Before RFP 90 Days Before RFP Days Before RFP RFP Release Contract Award CWIPT Formation CSDR Planning CSDR Contracting Reporting Contractor Submits Reports CSDR Reporting & Validation RFP Identified ID upcoming or pending RFPs Review all sources of contract information Ensure CSDR language and plan are included Initial Plan Drafted DCARC/CAPE/PARCA Review Plan CWIPT Approves Organize key players Draft initial plan Collect supporting documentation Service Cost Center Reviews DCARC/PARCA Director Reviews DDCA and PARCA Approve Host CSDR plan review at Service Cost Level Ensure Plan is reviewed by stakeholders Address pertinent cost community concerns Review plans for analytic rigor Dissemination to PO RFP Release Color Key Service Component POC Program Office OSD CAPE Service Cost Center POC DCARC Contractors PARCA CWIPT Dissemination to Contractors Contract Award Post Award Meeting Validation of Cost Reports Review all CSDR reports Ensure CSDR compliance Coordinate w/ contractors 90

91 Execution of Co-Plan Policy Pre-Contract Award: EV & CSDR reporting is outlined in Acquisition Strategy PMO coordination with CAPE/PARCA to develop Co-Plan Review of EV & CSDR CDRLs Review of EV and CSDR Reporting Structure Mapping, if not consistent with 881C Service EV & Cost Director, DCARC & EV Director, and PARCA/CAPE-Approved Post-Contract Award: Revision of Co-Plan reporting structures according to Contractor tailoring requests at Post Contract Award Meeting Contract reporting requirements established within EVM-CR and CSDR-SR CSDR and EVM reporting structures verified against Approved-CSDR/EVM Co- Plan 91

92 Pilot Status Potential pilots being reviewed as plans come up for development Going forward, the process is for CAPE and PARCA to leverage the standard plan templates, and then work with PMO, Services/Agencies, and Contractor (when applicable) to finalize 92

93 UAV Engine Electroni c Warfare C4I Missile Aircraf t Spac e Subcontract or STANDA RD Co- PLANS Avionic s AIS Investment ICB M Sustainment Launch Vehicle Vehicle Sea System 93

94 Status of Standard Plans Aircraft Development and Production UAV Development and Production Engine Development and Production Avionics Development and Production Electronic Warfare Development and Production Missile Development and Production Automated Information Systems C4I Electronics Development and Production C4I Radar Development and Production ICBM Development and Production Generic Sustainment Space Systems Development and Production Launch Systems Generic Subcontractor Modification Programs ERP Programs Surface Vehicle Ships Unmanned Underwater Vehicle Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete Complete Pending Pending Pending Pending Pending Initial set of AFCAA Standard Plans available for use on contracts this month against current 2011 CSDR Plan & 2015 CSDR/EVM Co-Plan Next Steps: Further buy-in via Comment Resolution Matrix Air Force Field Cost Chiefs CAPE Analysts Other Services Additional Standard Plans pending Future: More Standard Plans Continuous improvement through usage Implement in cpet and CADE 94

95 Sample Standard Co-Plan Lower-level WBS/CRS Extensions: EAC not required at lower levels Harmonized with Tech Data and Quantity CSDR Software elements harmonized with CSDR SRDR Common elements harmonized with SRDR Data Extension: Focused Subelements v IPMR Standard consistency at Level 3 FCHR and PCR at select elements of interest Rate Tooling Extension Warranty Extension v MIL-STD-881C COMPLIANCE CONFIRMED BY PARCA 95

96 2011 CSDR Plan Submission Events Development Production Sustainment 9

97 2015 Co-Plan Submission Events Development Production Sustainment 9

98 CADE Cost Assessment Data Enterprise CSDR Validation Process Presenter: Paola Jimenez Last Updated: May 06,

99 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Importance of Validations Ensures: Data completeness and accuracy SECURITY CLASSIFICATION Unclassified Form Approved COST DATA SUMMARY REPORT OMB No The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 8 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Executive Services Directorate ( ). Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO THE ABOVE ORGANIZATION. 1. MAJOR PROGRAM a. NAME: b. PHASE/MILESTONE 2. PRIME MISSION Pre-A B C-FRP PRODUCT A C-LRIP O&S 6. CUSTOMER (Direct-reporting 7. CONTRACT TYPE 8. CONTRACT PRICE subcontractor use only) 11. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE a. START DATE (YYYYMMDD): b. END DATE (YYYYMMDD): Metadata 3. REPORTING ORGANIZATION TYPE 4. NAME/ADDRESS (Include ZIP Code) 5. APPROVED PLAN PRIME / DIRECT- GOVERNMENT a. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION b. DIVISION NUMBER ASSOCIATE REPORTING CONTRACTOR SUBCONTRACTO R 9. CONTRACT 10. TYPE ACTION CEILING a. CONTRACT NO.: c. SOLICITATION NO.: e. TASK ORDER/DELIVERY b. LATEST MODIFICATION: d. NAME: ORDER/LOT NO.: 12. APPROPRIATION 13. REPORT CYCLE 14. SUBMISSION NUMBER 15. RESUBMISSION 16. REPORT AS OF (YYYYMMDD) NUMBER RDT&E INITIAL PROCUREMENT INTERIM O&M FINAL 17. NAME (Last, First, Middle Initial) 18. DEPARTMENT 19. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include Area Cod20. ADDRESS 21. DATE PREPARED (YYYYMMDD) WBS NUMBER OF NUMBER OF COSTS INCURRED TO DATE (thousands of U.S. Dollars) COSTS INCURRED AT COMPLETION (thousands of U.S. Dollars) ELEMENT WBS REPORTING ELEMENTS UNITS UNITS AT CODE TO DATE NONRECURRING RECURRING TOTAL COMPLETION NONRECURRING RECURRING TOTAL A B C D E F G H I J Comprehensive explanations of Element Codes and Reporting Elements To Date Units To Date Costs (Nonrecurring, Recurring, Total) At Completion Units At Completion Costs (Nonrecurring, Recurring, Total) anomalies prior to acceptance 22. REMARKS Remarks Collective review by the cost community DD FORM 1921, MAY 2011 PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION Unclassified Ability to create a consistent and robust dataset 99

100 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Top Level CSDR Validation Pre-Validation CSDR Validation CSDR Report Finalization Contractor creates/validates CCDRs using cpet Contractor submits CSDRs using cpet FYSA: THE CSDR S-R WILL BLOCK SUBMISSIONS WITH MAJOR ERRORS. USE cpet! DCARC initiates Validation PO/CAPE/SCC given five business days to review and provide DCARC any feedback DCARC compiles all government feedback and iterates with the contractor on necessary corrections DCARC s Validation Error Report to Contractor Contractor corrects CSDRs and re-submits DCARC re-validates CSDRs and proceeds to finalization stage DCARC proceeds with finalizing the reports If CSDRs are acceptable, DCARC finalizes by publishing CSDRs to CADE If CSDRs are not acceptable, DCARC finalizes by providing Contractor formal Rejection Notification with a 30 day resubmittal 100

101 When Creating a CWBS Dictionary: Do I define the purpose of the end item? Are my cost accounting assumptions described? Are all elements within scope defined and elements out of scope marked N/A? Save Some Time! Remember to Use cpet to Easily Build Your Index and Dictionary Template! 101

102 cpet Checks: CCDR Validation Process cpet Automated Checks CCDRs are XML Compatible CCDRs are consistent with the CSDR Contract Plan Validation Error Results Numbers sum correctly Checks for numerical anomalies 1921, , and reports are consistent *All major errors must be corrected prior to submittal. cpet will identify those errors for you. 102

103 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise cpet Major Errors Math Errors Comparison Errors - Nonrecurring/Recurring/Total figures do not sum correctly - Child elements do not sum to parent element correctly - Summary elements do not sum correctly - Group within data column does not sum correctly - Subtotal does not match root WBS element - Corresponding costs on and do not match - Corresponding quantities on /5 and 1921 do not match - Corresponding costs on /5 and 1921 do not match Form Errors - Blank WBS Element Code found for reporting element(s) - Redundant data provided for reporting element - Required reporting element omitted - Reporting Contractor G&A reports zero cost at completion - Reporting Contractor Profit/Loss or Fee reports zero cost at completion - Systems Engineering/Program Management reports zero cost at completion 103

104 Reviewing Major Errors in the S-R The DCARC POC s are listed at the top of the report for you to contact with questions. Submitters will have the option to Export the Error Report to Excel, or Validation Error Report to another user. The cpet Validation Error Report will now be displayed on the Validation screen. ALL identified Major errors MUST be corrected in order to proceed to the next step in the upload process. 104

105 Proceed without Major Errors If no Major cpet Errors are identified in the report, the contractor can proceed with submission 105

106 Manual Checks: CCDR Validation Process Manual Checks All metadata is reported accurately Units are reported accurately Costs are categorized correctly Costs increase from previous report Appropriate and accurate explanations 106

107 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Can t Submit? What Next? ALWAYS run the cost reports through cpet Web or Desktop to identify and correct Major errors PRIOR to submission to DCARC/CADE Submit-Review application If Major errors are identified, the cost reports MUST be corrected in order to proceed with the upload Who to call? Contact the POC who compiled the cost reports, and provide them with the exported cpet Validation Error Report Contact the DCARC POC, listed on the ratings Upload screen, for further information on how 107 Submissions delayed or effected by the Submit-Review s cpet Auto-Review feature will NOT be subject to date changes or extensions and may affect the program s compliance

108 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise SRDR Validations SRDR Validations All metadata is reported accurately Contractor submits SRDR DCARC completes Initial Review **SURF Team completes their review** DCARC sends the Validation Error Report to the contractor Contractor resubmits updated SRDR Accurate explanation of software characteristics Discrete software size and effort reported Discrete reporting by release and CSCI Data dictionary provides necessary insight 108

109 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise DCARC Analyst: SRDR Submission received from DCARC SURF Primary: Navy Corrinne Wallshein Marine Corps Noel Bishop Air Force Ethan Henry Army Jim Judy CAPE Bill Raines MDA Dan Strickland SURF Secondary: Scott Washel Nick Lanham Dane Cooper Jeremiah Hayden Min-Jung Gantt John Bryant Jim Otte Janet Wentworth Eric Unger Chinson Yew Michael Smith Michael Duarte N/A N/A Performs pre and post SRDR acceptance Validation and Verification (V&V) with DCARC Uses a detailed first-ever published joint V&V guide Training guide used to determine SRDR quality tags for database SRDRs distributed among SURF members to balance workload 109

110 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Collaborative Validation DCARC: Review reports for compliance with the DIDs and Policy (i.e. cost and units are accurately reported) Develop the validation error report Validates reports using cpet Program Office: Data reflects entire contract Accurate and complete explanations Correct data reported for all elements in scope Product characteristics and functional breakdown validation Correct variant reporting Nonrecurring and recurring costs reported accurately Service Cost Center/CAPE: Provides enterprise wide perspective to ensure consistency across programs Ensures data reported provides insight needed to support estimating decisions 110

111 CSDR Compliance Rating Criteria Rating criteria emphasizes on time data submission OF NOTE: CSDRs Assessed Qtrly w/daes Reviewed as a part of DABs No ICE issued w/o approved CSDR plan on contract *CSDR deliverables include Contract Data Reporting Structure Dictionaries, CCDRs, SRDRs, and CDRLs 111

112 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise CSDR Validation Summary CSDRs are validated consistently prior to acceptance in order to populate a robust dataset of historical cost data Government Analysts involvement in validation of reports is crucial to receiving quality data 3 Steps to Success: Follow the CSDR Plan Use the latest Data Item Description (DID) Use cpet! Quality Data Leads to Quality Analysis! 112

113 Final Thoughts Register for Portal Access immediately so you have an account ready in order to submit your CSDRs Visit the CADE website frequently for updates to forms, DIDs, policies, or procedures that can impact your submission Notify DCARC immediately if you receive a Validation Error Report or a formal Rejection Memo and need additional time to resubmit. Not submitting promptly can impact the Program s DAES assessment For more Validation Training, please visit the breakout rooms for the Advanced cpet/validation Case Study or cpet Training Labs Tools for CSDR success are available at 113

114 DCARC Point of Contacts Army Navy Air Force DoD and MAIS Linh Le (703) Sandi Enser (571) Linnay Thomas (571) Brian Kolstad (571) Marc Stephenson (703) Emily Beltramo (571) James Parnham (571) Olivia Collins (571) Cathy Ferguson mil (571) Paola Jimenez (571) Daron Fullwood, DCARC Director, CADE Deputy Program Manager , Brandon Bryant, DCARC Training POC , CADE Website: 114

115 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Round Table Discussion 115

116 Cost Estimating using CSDR Data You are a government cost estimator preparing an independent LCCE for a MS C decision on a new attack helicopter MDAP program. Answer the following questions: What data would you use to prepare the estimate? How could you apply historical CSDR data to support your estimate? How could CSDRs be more useful to you? 116

117 CWIPT Roles and Responsibilities An MDAP program that you are responsible for is entering MS B a year from now. Please answer the following questions: Which offices make up the CWIPT? What are the roles and responsibilities of each member? What can you do to ensure an approved plan is included in the RFP? 117

118 CSDR Validations A final report for an MDAP program that you are responsible for was just submitted to the DCARC. Please answer the following questions: What role do you play in the validation process? What can you do to ensure the data reported is accurate and complete? What tools can you use to help support your validation process? 118

119 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise (CADE) CADE Total Access Demo 18 May 2016 Bess Dopkeen, CADE Program Manager Peter Braxton, CADE Training (703) (703) Daron Fullwood, Director DCARC Brandon Bryant, CADE Training (571) (571)

120 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise CADE Objectives/KPPs Improve Analyst Productivity (at all levels: OSD, Services, PMOs) Increase output per unit time Provide near real-time access to data, more data, and less burden on the analyst to retrieve and process Reduce time for analyst to climb the program familiarization learning curve Effectiveness Enable more comprehensive assessments Gain insight from previous analysts Facilitate telling the program s story, holistic analysis Data Quality and Reporting Compliance Improvement Includes all the Department s cost data - both EVM and CSDRs Comprehensiveness Having all information at the analyst s fingertips a centralized virtual library 120

121 Initiate IIIA SV Procurement End IIRM Retrofit Initiate IIRM Retrofit End IIR SV Procurement End II/IIA SV Procurement Initiate IIF Initiate II/IIA SV Procurement SV Procurement Initiate IIR SV Procurement Navstar Space and Control PE (O&M) OCX PE (Development & Procurement) Mixed Development PEs GPS IIIA/B PE (Procurement) GPS IIIA/B PE (Development) Navstar Space and Control PE (MILCON) Navstar Space and Control PE (MilPer) Navstar Space and Control PE (Procurement) Navstar Space and Control PE (Development) 3 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Analysis Evolution Time to Prepare Estimate Data Sources Program Office DACIMS SARs DAES Contractors Service O&S Data Libraries Colleagues Network EVM-CR DACIMS DAMIR Contractors Service O&S Data Libraries EVM Visual Display DCARC Bulk Download DAMIR Contractors Service O&S Data Libraries CADE Total Access Service O&S Data Libraries CADE Total Access 2.0 FLAT Synthesi s and Analysis Manual Entry Cut & paste Automated Entry Manual Analysis Automated analytics Complete, seamless knowledge sharing 121

122 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A ########## #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A ########## ########### ########### ########### ########### 1.4 Matching Results: Status Over Time Contract X-Axis Y-Axis USS Voyager TRUE TRUE TRUE 1.2 Voyager Class TRUE TRUE TRUE Death Star TRUE TRUE TRUE 1 CTR EAC X-Wing Fighter FALSE FALSE TRUE PM EAC 0.8 CTR Schedule Months PM Schedule Months 0.6 % Complete % Spent 0.4 CPI SPI 0.2 Program Contract Name Start End Voy Contract 1 11/30/2001 2/26/2017 Details Voy Contract 2 5/1/1997 3/1/2001 Details Voy Contract 3 5/1/ /1/2000 Details VCS Contract 1 5/15/2008 2/6/2017 Details VCS Contract 2 12/26/2010 1/24/2016 Details 3500 DS Contract 1 9/24/2004 1/14/2014 Details Primary Y-Axis: XWF Contract 1 2/1/ /1/2002 Details XWF Contract 2 3/1/1998 9/1/2005 Details Voy VCS DS XWF XWF XWF Voy VCS DS XWF XWF XWF Refresh Legend X-Axis: Secondary Y-Axis (dashed lines): View Program Milestones: Refresh Legend Select Baseline: #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A ########## #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A ########## ########### ########### ########### ########### Cost Assessment Data Enterprise Seamless integration of authoritative data sources NDA Administration CADE Vision of the Future: CPR, IMS, CCDR and SRDR VATs New website/ portal design CPR Visual Display Total Analyst Access Program-level Visual Display CCDR Visual Display Software Visual Display IMS Visual Display Vision of Future Capability Contractor Compliance Report Card View: Program Contract Contract Detail: ICE vs SAR Automated Analysis Portfolio Analysis Current Value: SPI PM EAC Status Value Change to Baseline: PM EAC Performance Over Time Calendar Search CADE: Help Desk Data Retrieval Data Quality Data Visualization Tools Widgets Community Knowledge / Data Upload Suggestions / Feedback Comment/Question: (Max 1024 chr) Data Availability CPR *IPMR Cost *History Formatted Cost Search for a program among official language and the law. O & S EVM - Task 1 Sep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14 Jan-14 Feb-14 Bulk Download Continually expanding set of widget capabilities CERs y = ax b V A T s

123 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A ########## #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A ########## ########### ########### ########### ########### Cost Assessment Data Enterprise CADE Integration Across the Community FFRDC Other Gov t GAO Reports CRS Law and Language JDocs Budget Info AT&L AIR Authoritative Documents DAMIR AT&L/SE Technical Data Collection DCMA Contract Business Analysis Repository (CBAR) Cost Community SAR Database JCARD Cost Database Collaborative Cost Research Library (CCRL) JIAT/ACDB: Cost, Technical & Contract Data AFCAA (CEM) Cost Estimating Modeling Contracts Database Tool Joint CSRUH Tri-Service Missile DB/Handbook CADE Foundations PARCA: EVM Cost and Schedule Data Quick Access to Data and Visual Analysis Tools DCARC: CSDR Cost and Software Data 123

124 CADE Authoritative Data Sources Data Type Programmatic Cost Earned Value Technical Data Quantity Funding Events Costs Hours NR/Rec Functional Categories By Tail # AC/PV/EV EAC/VAC CV/SV CPI/SPI IMS SW Size & Effort Size, Weight, & Power Reports SARs DAES Reports 1921, , , Dict. CPRs IPMRs SRDR TDR Source DAMIR DACIMS EVM-CR DACIMS Owner ARA DCARC PARCA DCARC CADE provides quick access to Cost data integrated with other data types 124

125 CADE Data Access Cost Assessment Data Enterprise *CCDR migration ongoing Era Programmatic Cost Earned Value Technical (SW) new post-1997 SAR [DAMIR] Acq Db (flat file export) post-2014* CCDR (XML) [SR, DACIMS] CCDR Db (flat file export) post-2013 IPMR EV Db (flat file export), IMS Native Format post-2015 SRDR Dev/Maint XML, SRDR Db old * CCDR (Excel) [SR, DACIMS] CCDR Db (flat file export) CPR, IMS, History File EV Db (flat file export), IMS Native Format SRDR Initial/Final CSDR Format Export, SRDR Db older * CCDR (pdf) [DACIMS] CSDR Format Export CPR (EDI) CPR Format Export /-3 CSDR Format Export, SRDR Db oldest pre-1997 SAR (pdf)?? (no DAMIR Legacy) CCDR (TIF) DACIMS Legacy pre-2005 CPR (Excel)?? (no EVM- CR Legacy) pre-2004 Newer data are available in a more usable format none N/A 125

126 Cost Assessment Data Enterprise CADE Total Access Home Page Site-Level Navigation Contextual Help and Feedback Program-specific data Immediate access to Favorite Programs Shortcuts to related information